Repository navigation
Reduce check-shims indexing work - #2729
Merged
Merged
Conversation
KaanOzkan
force-pushed
the
ko-check-shims-filtered-index
branch
3 times, most recently
from
September 30, 2026 20:37
75272ed to
50458d9
Compare
KaanOzkan
commented
Sep 30, 2026
| #: (RBI::Index index, String kind, String dir, number_of_workers: Integer?) -> void | ||
| def index_rbis(index, kind, dir, number_of_workers:) | ||
| index_rbis_with_filter(index, kind, dir, number_of_workers: number_of_workers, index_ids: nil) | ||
| end |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I opted to make the index_ids parameter contract more explicit by creating 2 separate functions with different names.
amomchilov
approved these changes
Oct 26, 2026
amomchilov
left a comment
amomchilov
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Make sense to me, just a few small suggestions
Comment on lines
+143
to
+144
| return unless File.exist?(file) | ||
|
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TOC-TOU
Just let File.read fail, and rescue the exception.
|
|
||
| #: (RBI::Index index, String kind, String dir, index_ids: Set[String], number_of_workers: Integer?) -> void | ||
| def index_filtered_rbis(index, kind, dir, index_ids:, number_of_workers:) | ||
| index_rbis_with_filter(index, kind, dir, number_of_workers: number_of_workers, index_ids: index_ids) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| index_rbis_with_filter(index, kind, dir, number_of_workers: number_of_workers, index_ids: index_ids) | |
| index_rbis_with_filter(index, kind, dir, number_of_workers:, index_ids:) |
|
|
||
| #: (RBI::Index index, String kind, String dir, number_of_workers: Integer?, index_ids: Set[String]?) -> void | ||
| def index_rbis_with_filter(index, kind, dir, number_of_workers:, index_ids:) | ||
| return unless Dir.exist?(dir) && !Dir.empty?(dir) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Likewise. Just try the access, and rescue if missing or not a dir
KaanOzkan
force-pushed
the
ko-check-shims-filtered-index
branch
from
October 26, 2026 20:51
50458d9 to
b6f5463
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
Addressed suggestions, initial tests show 2.2x speedup in Core 🚀 |
KaanOzkan
added
refactor
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
check-shimsonly reports generated definitions that overlap with shim or TODO definitions, but it previously built a complete index for every payload, gem, DSL, and annotation RBI.Part of #2728
Implementation
Before:
After:
This keeps the duplicate-detection behavior unchanged while reducing worker serialization and shared-index work.
Tests
Ran the focused
check-shimstests, typecheck, and RuboCop.